Ernest Yelton, the executive director of the commission, said 3,193 Indianans are enrolled in the program, which allows those with gambling problems to voluntarily request to be excluded from Indiana casinos for a period of one year, five years or a lifetime.
He said that 1,532 of those enrolled in Indiana are lifetime members. Members can only be removed from the program at their request.
"The point is to self-help individuals who believe they might have an issue with gaming," Yelton said. "Due to their circumstances, they don't want to go back and gamble again."
Yelton said that if members of the program are caught in any of the 13 casinos in the state, they are subject to arrest for trespassing. And any of their winnings must be forfeited.
While Kephart declined to be an interviewed by ABCNews.com, in a 2007 interview with The (Louisville) Courier-Journal, she said that she never asked to be banned because she "didn't realize how seriously addicted she had become."
"They knew I had money, and they went after it," said Kephart, who attributed her gambling addiction to her former job as a dealer in the mid-1990s. Since that time, Kephart told the paper, she estimated that she'd gambled away at least $900,000. Today, Kephart's attorney says his client is in Nashville, Tenn., where she is currently unemployed.
Ed Feigenbaum, the editor of Indiana Gaming Insight, and a lawyer, said that the decision by the Supreme Court to take on the Kephart case is telling and could have ramifications that reach far beyond Indiana's borders.
"In Indiana, there isn't a great deal of law and certainly, not real, black-letter law on this particular topic," said Feigenbaum, who has no connection to the Kephart case. "We've only had casinos since the beginning of the 1990s, so we're still experiencing a lot of the general civil litigation that follows these types of things."
Feigenbaum said he has rarely seen the appellate judges be as outspoken in their court opinions as they were in the Kephart case and that might be the reason the Supreme Court starting paying attention, he said.
Even in the majority opinion, which was 2-1, one of the judges expressed concerns about the casino's willingness to extend credit to Kephart.
The outcome of the Kephart case could also influence gambling law elsewhere, said Feigenbaum, who added that he couldn't think of another case in which a U.S. court has ruled in favor of the compulsive gambler.
"This is a court that has gained some notice in recent years for being well-reasoned," he said. "This is a ruling that, one way or another, could be looked at by other courts and picked up upon."
The hearing for the Kephart case is scheduled to begin Oct. 29.